The influence of uncertain map features on risk beliefs and perceived ambiguity for maps of modeled cancer risk from air pollution

Pragmatic and (or) Constitutive? On the Foundations of Contemporary Risk Communication Research

A diffuse and interdisciplinary field, risk communication research, is founded on how we understand the process and purpose of communication more generally. To that end, this article outlines two fundamental functions of risk communication: (1) a pragmatic function, in which senders direct messages at audiences (and vice versa), with various intended (and sometimes unintended) effects; and (2) a constitutive function, in which messages re(create) what we mean by "risk" in a given social context, including how we can, and/or should relate to it. Although representing distinct epistemological and theoretical social scientific traditions, these functions necessarily coexist in a broader understanding of risk communication, including its so-called "effectiveness." The article concludes by considering how we might enact this fuller understanding of risk communication's dual functions through engagement in collaborative, sustainability science-oriented research.

Using maps to communicate environmental exposures and health risks: Review and best-practice recommendations

BACKGROUND

Graphical materials can be effective communication tools, and maps in particular are a potentially powerful means of conveying spatial information. Previous reviews have provided insights on the application of cartographic best practices, pitfalls to avoid, and considerations related to risk perception and communication, but none has reviewed primary studies of the effectiveness or utility of maps to users, nor have they addressed the issue from the perspective of health literacy, environmental health literacy, or public health ethics.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically identify and review the literature pertaining to evaluation of maps in general, or specific map features, as environmental exposure and health risk communication tools; to formulate best-practice recommendations; and to identify future research priorities.

METHODS

A health science librarian searched the literature for commentaries, reviews, and primary studies. Titles, abstracts, and full-text papers were screened for inclusion, and details of methods and results were extracted from 4 reviews and commentaries and 18 primary studies. This was supplemented by one additional review and 13 additional primary studies pertaining to use of maps for communication about wildfires and floods. One additional paper was identified by reviewing reference lists of all relevant papers.

RESULTS

and Discussion: While there are significant gaps in the evidence, we formulated best practice recommendations highlighting the perspectives of health literacy and environmental health literacy. Key recommendations include: understanding the map developer's societal role and mental model underlying map design; defining, understanding and iteratively engaging with map users; informing map design using key theoretical constructs; accounting for factors affecting risk perception; adhering to risk communication principles and cartographic best practices; and considering environmental justice and public health ethics implications. Recommendations for future research are also provided.

Communicating Geographical Risks in Crisis Management: The Need for Research

In any crisis, there is a great deal of uncertainty, often geographical uncertainty or, more precisely, spatiotemporal uncertainty. Examples include the spread of contamination from an industrial accident, drifting volcanic ash, and the path of a hurricane. Estimating spatiotemporal probabilities is usually a difficult task, but that is not our primary concern. Rather, we ask how analysts can communicate spatiotemporal uncertainty to those handling the crisis. We comment on the somewhat limited literature on the representation of spatial uncertainty on maps. We note that many cognitive issues arise and that the potential for confusion is high. We note that in the early stages of handling a crisis, the uncertainties involved may be deep, i.e., difficult or impossible to quantify in the time available. In such circumstance, we suggest the idea of presenting multiple scenarios.

Residential Location and Psychological Distance in Americans' Risk Views and Behavioral Intentions Regarding Zika Virus

Two 2017 experiments with a U.S. national opportunity sample tested effects of location, psychological distance (PD), and exposure to location-related information on Americans' Zika risk views and behavioral intentions. Location-distance from mosquito transmission of the virus in Florida and Texas; residence within states with 100+ Zika infections; residence within potential mosquito vector ranges-had small, inconsistent effects. Hazard proximity weakly enhanced personal risk judgments and concern about Zika transmission locally. It also increased psychological proximity, and intentions of mosquito control, avoiding travel to Zika-infected areas, and practicing safe sex. PD-particularly social and geographical distance, followed by temporal distance, with few effects for uncertainty-modestly and inconsistently decreased risk views and intentions. Exposure to location-related information from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website-naming states with 100+ Zika cases; maps of potential mosquito vector habitat-increased risk views and psychological closeness, but not intentions; maps had slightly stronger if inconsistent effects versus prevalence information. Structural equation modeling (SEM) of a location > PD > risk views > intention path explained modest variance in intentions. This varied in degree and kind (e.g., which location measures were significant) across behaviors, and between pre- and postinformation exposure analyses. These results suggest need for both theoretical and measurement advances regarding effects of location and PD on risk views and behavior. PD mediates location effects on risk views. Online background information, like that used here, will not enhance protective behavior without explicitly focused communication and perhaps higher objective risk.

Testing Map Features Designed to Convey the Uncertainty of Cancer Risk: Insights Gained From Assessing Judgments of Information Adequacy and Communication Goals

Barriers to communicating the uncertainty of environmental health risks include preferences for certain information and low numeracy. Map features designed to communicate the magnitude and uncertainty of estimated cancer risk from air pollution were tested among 826 participants to assess how map features influenced judgments of adequacy and the intended communication goals. An uncertain versus certain visual feature was judged as less adequate but met both communication goals and addressed numeracy barriers. Expressing relative risk using words communicated uncertainty and addressed numeracy barriers but was judged as highly inadequate. Risk communication and visual cognition concepts were applied to explain findings.

The influence of environmental hazard maps on risk beliefs, emotion, and health-related behavioral intentions

To test a theoretical explanation of how attributes of mapped environmental health hazards influence health-related behavioral intentions and how beliefs and emotion mediate the influences of attributes, 24 maps were developed that varied by four attributes of a residential drinking water hazard: level, proximity, prevalence, and density. In a factorial design, student participants (N = 446) answered questions about a subset of maps. Hazard level and proximity had the largest influences on intentions to test water and mitigate exposure. Belief in the problem's seriousness mediated attributes' influence on intention to test drinking water, and perceived susceptibility mediated the influence of attributes on intention to mitigate risk. Maps with carefully illustrated attributes of hazards may promote appropriate health-related risk beliefs, intentions, and behavior.